Courtroom Participants' Professional Standards

The prosecutor has more contact with everyone involved with the crime than maybe anyone else. He or she has contact with the person suspected of the crime, the victim, witnesses, and also works alongside the police to investigate and ensure the correct person is held accountable.

In “The Adversary Judge” Frankel explains how realities of the trial create a “role conflict” between the ideally constructed impartial judge and the realistic adversary judge (Frankel, 1976). Throughout their day people play many roles, these roles are based on the expectations of the people around them and the personality of the person (Frankel, 1976). In particular, judges are expected to play the role of neutrality, intelligence, and patience. Their role is thought to be similar of an “umpire” (Frankel, 1976). It is necessary for them to be objective in order for a just and fair trial to take place. Yet, this ideal role does not occur under the pressure of realities. One reality that pushes away the idea of an “umpire” judge is the heated emotions that occur throughout the trial process. Frankel states” the courtroom explodes as people spring up at several tables shouting objections, usually loudly because they are in some haste and heat to cut off forbidden answers” (Frankel, 1976, p. 472). The attorney’s main goals throughout the trail is to ensure a win for their client leading to competitiveness between both parties. Attorneys do not want to hear they are wrong and always need to be one step ahead of their competitors. This causes the commotion and tense emotions that is usually seen in courts.

While all of the topics that we have covered throughout this course have been troubling, the topic of prosecutorial misconduct is to me one of the most distressing; the mere thought of the possibility of misconduct by prosecutors gives me the chills, and the numerous examples featured within the assigned chapter readings, in addition to the online articles, only further my skepticism in the legal system and those individuals holding official positions. There appears to be a lot of similarities between prosecutorial misconduct and the topics that we discussed as possible reasons for faulty forensic science, such as a common trust bias in police officials, lack of universal standards, and other cognitive biases such as confirmation bias and belief perseverance.

In today’s society the criminal justice system that we live in is flawed in so many ways. Some say that it works while others go to prison or jail for crimes that they didn’t commit. In this paper I will be covering specific examples from the book, The Innocent Man, where the defendant’s rights were violated. John Grisham talks about innocent men being innocent and convicted for murder and sent to unlawful court proceedings. In this paper I will be focusing mainly on the violations of his 6th amendment. The 6th amendment is the right to effective assistance of counsel.

Evidence Code Section 1102(b) specifically provides that prosecutors can introduce character evidence to rebut the good character evidence presented by the

The criminal trial process is an interesting process that takes place in Courtrooms all across the United States and throughout the globe. This study intends to set out the various steps in the criminal trial process in the American justice system. A trial is described as a "legal forum for resolving individual disputes, and in the case of a criminal charge, it is a means for establishing whether an accused person is legally guilty of an offense. The trial process varies with respect to whether the matter at issue is civil in nature or criminal. In either case, a jury acts as a fact-finding body for the court in assessing information and evidence that is presented by the respective parties in a case. A judge presides over the court and addresses all the legal issues that arise during the trial. A judge also instructs the jury how to apply the facts to the laws that will govern in a given case." (3rd Judicial District, 2012)

The Supreme Court clarified their requirement of positional predisposition in Jacobson v. United States, 503 U.S. 540 (1992) (O’Connor, J., dissenting). The court ruled that in addition to the defendant’s state of mind,

The courtroom work group consists of individuals who work together to successfully prosecute a case, such as criminal prosecutors, criminal defense attorneys, and probation officers. The courtroom work group, then, carries the case through the justice system to its logical conclusion dismissal, conviction, and failure to convict. Although the public is set to believe that the judge makes all the principal decisions in the court, he or she normally accepts bail recommendations from prosecutors, plea-bargains from defense attorneys, and sentence recommendations from probation officers. Defense attorneys, private or appointed, ensure that the defendant's rights are protected and they are to defend their client throughout all criminal proceedings.

To begin with, the job a prosecutor has is to gather the facts of the case, along with interviewing material witnesses, and study the evidence that was collected. Next, there may be two attorneys who work the case and both should make the case hold up in court. Finally, an example of a case “where the prosecutor was unethical was when Michael B. Nifong charged Duke university lacrosse team in 2007 with sexual assault, and other crimes, although the evidence collected did not prove that they were guilty.” (pg.)

The Rule 403 of the F.R.E., states that relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is outweighed by unfair prejudice. This is to say, when something has been present to the jury that would produce unfair prejudice and could develop an adverse opinion prior to having sufficient knowledge of relevant facts. (Britz, 2008, pp. 273 - 274). In the case of Spencer v. Texas, the Petitioners, was convicted of a felonies in Texas.

In an Arkansas capital murder prosecution that had resulted in conviction and sentences of death based on the killing of four members of a family defense counsel learned after the conviction had been reversed that a key prosecution witness, the defendant’s son, who testified against his father implicating him in the murders at trial, has also given prosecutors a statement in which he claimed responsibility for the crimes and exculpated his father. Defense counsel moved to dismiss the prosecution on the ground of prosecutorial misconduct, but the Arkansas Supreme Court rejected the prior jeopardy claim and permitting the retrial to proceed, while referring the prosecutors involved to the court’s Committee on Professional Conduct for consideration of possible ethical violations. On retrial, the defendant was again convicted, although his son did not testify against him at this proceeding. Issues of prosecutorial misconduct in this case and remedies for misconduct are examined in this article.

There are a number of ways for a prosecutor to commit misconduct. He could make inappropriate comments to jurors, or coax witnesses into giving false or misleading testimony. But one of the most pervasive misdeeds is the Brady violation, or the failure to turn over favorable evidence to the defendant.

Modeling on Bogoch’s (1999) methodology, this study will look at transcript of trials with a focus on terms of address, intrusions, and comments directed from the court to the lawyer who is currently holding the speaking turn, but will also focus on the language of the lawyers as they interact with the witnesses and will allow for new categories to emerge from the analysis

The prosecution has very factual definitions of truth and justice. A prosecutor’s role is to represent the state/jurisdiction they belong to. They focus on ensuring that the guilty are punished and are held accountable for their crimes. Since they represent society, they also need to make sure the innocent are not prosecuted. Giving them this amount of discretion allows them to be the gate keepers of our criminal justice system. As the gate keepers, their ethics stem from the facts of the law. To them, the truth means the charge was brought forth in a lawful way and there is enough evidence to indict the presumed guilty. Seeking the truth begins at the very beginning of a case. When it lands on the desk of a prosecutor the first step is to make sure the arrest/gathering of

Going into this particular assignment I wasn’t really sure what to expect or even where I needed to go to see an interesting case mainly because I had never been to the County building before or observed a courtroom proceeding before. However, I went this past Thursday to try to watch and see what I could learn. When I arrived to the county building I wasn’t sure where the courtrooms were so I was kind of wandering around. After a few minutes a man approached me and asked what I was there for and I told him to observe a courtroom for a class so he directed me to the info office for further help. After explaining to them why I was there an officer told me Courtroom 4 which is the Major Felony court had some interesting cases so I should go there. Throughout the duration of this paper I will explain in detail the five different cases that I observed while I was there.